Or Send Donations by post to:

Press Release 16th September 2009 HPA Wi-fi 'Research' is Pure Spin

Nearly 2 Years ago Mast
Sanity welcomed the announcement from the UK's Health Protection Agency (HPA)
that more research was to be done into Wi-Fi[1] after Sir William Stewart requested an
enquiry into Wi-Fi in schools.[5]

However we believed at the
time that this ‘Research' was merely a smokescreen, to appear to be doing something without actually doing
anything new.

And so it has proved to be.

Mast Sanity asked in 2007[12]:

1) What is this 'research'
going to be about?

Are the HPA only taking
measurements of Wi-fi signal levels (as they state in their press release)? Or
are they going to look to see if there are any health effects on children
[already being exposed to Wi-fi] in schools [across the UK] by taking blood
samples, measuring heart rates and brain response (EEG's) and doing health
surveys?

We already know what the [microwave
radiation] levels emitted from the Wi-fi laptops and routers are. OFCOM (one of
the HPA's 'partner' Agencies) has already taken measurements in schools [in
Birmingham].[11]

Powerwatch have already done
this [on the Panorama investigation into Wi-fi in schools in 2007] [8]
as have various campaign groups. It is no mystery.

What the HPA did[2]:

Scientists at the Health
Protection Agency began a research project on wireless local area networks
(WLAN) [Wi-Fi] in late 2007. One aspect of public concern over Wi-Fi is its use
by children in schools. So as part of its study into the technology scientists
set up 15 laptop computers commonly used in UK schools and investigated the
strength of the radiowaves [microwave radiation] around them. ... Computer
modelling is also being carried out to learn more about how the radio waves are
absorbed in the body. [The HPA results concur with those taken by Powerwatch
and measured by the other agencies above and yet it took them 2 years and cost
the taxpayer £300,000!]

NO real tests carried out on already exposed children for health effects

NO blood samples

NO heart rate measuring

NO EEG measurements taken

IGNORED the constant emissions from the Wi-fi routers also present

IGNORED a request in 2007 to do a proper study from 8 members of the HPA EMF
Discussion Group[14]

Mast Sanity noted and asked
in 2007:

2) The HPA are still going
to compare the levels with the outdated ICNIRP guidelines.

We know that the ICNIRP
guidelines only protect against short term heating effects and are not
appropriate to protect against cancer and genetic [i.e. biological,
non-heating] damage over the long-term. This was highlighted in the recent
Bioinitiative Report[3].

Sir William Stewart also
said the World Health Organisation (WHO) are wrong in their evaluation of the
science behind the guidelines[5]
and the Stewart report[4] said that relying solely on the
guidelines will not protect people from biological (non-heating) effects that
may become apparent.

Mast Sanity spokesperson
Yasmin Skelt says "Independent Scientific studies have consistently
shown health effects from microwave emissions well below currently allowed
levels[3,6,7] - so what is the point of comparing emissions against
these outdated ICNIRP guidelines?"

What the HPA did:

The tests were carried
out in a specially adapted laboratory at the HPA's Centre for Radiation,
Chemicals and Environmental Hazards in Oxfordshire. The effective powers in the
direction of maximum emission were in the range 17 to 57 milliwatts (mW) and
well within the 100 mW limit set for Europe [ICNIRP]. Dr Simon Mann ... said:
"Our findings are consistent with the HPA position that exposures to the
radio waves from Wi-Fi equipment are expected to be well within
internationally-accepted exposure guidelines [ICNIRP] and less than levels from
mobile phones."

So - This
has been a pointless exercise in spin by the HPA at the Tax Payers' expense.
All it shows is that the levels of Wi-fi microwave radiation will not greatly heat-up
children in their class rooms. We already knew that. We said so 2 years ago.

It does not prove
that Wi-Fi is safe.

The following points (and many more) have still not
been addressed:-

·
The Department of Education
guidelines state that a school should not be in the main beam of a Mobile Phone
Mast.[4] The microwave
radiation intensity in a classroom with Wi-fi is the same order of magnitude as
if the schools were in the main beam of a mobile phone mast.[2]

·
Philip Parkin, General Secretary of VOICE, said [15]:
"I have concerns about the health of
both pupils and staff...I am concerned that so many wireless networks are being
installed in schools and colleges without any understanding of the possible
long-term consequences."

The German government is
already advising its citizens to use wired internet connections instead of
Wi-Fi, and landlines instead of mobile phones[9]. Why isn't the HPA
doing the same?

The Public Health Dept of
the Salzburg Government has issued advice not to use WLAN in schools and
nurseries [16]

The Frankfurt Local Education Authority have
banned wireless networks in schools as they ‘did not wish to conduct a "large scale human experiment"

The Bavarian Parliament
recommend to all schools in the land to refrain from installing wireless LAN
networks. [17]

The Executive Director of
the EU's European Environment Agency said that, "it would be prudent for
health authorities to recommend actions to reduce exposures, especially to
vulnerable groups, such as children."
The Agency called for immediate action to reduce exposure to radiation
from Wi-Fi, mobile phones and their masts.
It suggests that delay could lead to a health crisis similar to those
caused by asbestos and smoking[10]. Our government is increasing our
exposure to microwave radiation, not decreasing it.

Mast Sanity trustee Yasmin
Skelt said back in 2007 "Why is the HPA happy to increase Wi-fi use in schools when it says it knows
little about its health effects - in effect our children are guinea pigs for
its own research." This is still the case.

Mast Sanity call for the UK
Government to remove Wi-Fi from all UK schools[13] -

Some Facts about Cell Phone Radiation by Dr. Andrew Goldsworthy July 2009

I was an amateur
radio enthusiast before becoming a professional biologist, but kept my interest
in radio throughout a long career as a lecturer at Imperial College London. No
one appreciates more than I the wonders of engineering that have gone into even
the cheapest cell phone, but equally I know the very real dangers that cell
phone signals present to both the user and people living near cell towers.

Unmodulated radio waves are relatively safe

It has been known
since the work of Suzanne Bawin and her co-workers in the mid 1970s that pure
low power radio waves, of strengths similar to those used by cell phones, are
relatively harmless. Pretty much the only damage that can be done by an unmodulated
signal is due to the heating effect of the radiation as it passes through the
body, and the ICNIRP safety guidelines adopted by many governments are more
than adequate to protect you against that.

Modulated radio waves are not safe

Bawin et al. also showed that the situation
changes drastically when the signal is "amplitude modulated" so that its
strength rises and falls in time with a lower frequency. In particular, they
found that signals that were far too weak to generate significant heat, could
now drive structurally important calcium from the surfaces of brain cells.
Other work showed that pulses with very sharp rise and fall times were even
more effective. The loss of this calcium weakens the membrane and makes it more
likely to leak and gives unwanted biological effects.

Cell phone signals are modulated

Cell phone
signals have to be "modulated" if they are to carry information such as speech
and the various control signals needed to make the system work. Most digital
modulation systems involve sharp changes in signal strength. These occur over a
wide range of frequencies, some of which are biologically active. Furthermore,
they occur at radiation levels many orders of magnitude lower than those
specified by the ICNIRP guidelines. These guidelines are therefore set far too
high to protect us from modulated radiation.

Nature Abhors a Vacuum

It's a
well-known truism that nature will exploit every ecological niche, however
small and unlikely. Life is to be found
in the deepest darkest trenches of the oceans, the coldest Arctic wastes, the
smallest crevices in rocks deep underground.
Even in the most abundant and densely-populated environments, if there
is a potential food source or habitat unclaimed then some species will arise or
adapt to make the fullest possible use of it.

Mobile Phones and Brain Tumours – A Public Health Concern

The completion of this paper on February 7, 2008 follows 14 months of objective
research by the author, involving the critical review of over 100 sources in the recent
medical and scientific literature, in addition to Press reports and Internet content. This
paper represents a systematic and concise yet comprehensive review of this area to date
and its findings highlight an emerging global public health concern.

The London Resolution

At a scientific conference on
27th November 2007 entitled-"Are Present ICNIRP EMF Exposure Recommendations
Adequate?", hosted by Roger Coghill and Robert Verkerk,
at the Royal Society, London,
scientists endorsed the BioInitiative Report, extended the 2006 Benevento
Resolution and resolved that:

"We, the undersigned, do call on theUKHealth Protection Agency (HPA), UK Government and all the health protection
agencies and governments world-wide, to take note of the findings and
recommendations in the Bioinitiative Report (2007) [1] and its predecessors the
Benevento Resolution (2006) [2], the Catania Resolution (2002) [3] and the Salzburg Resolution (2000) [4] to immediately reduce the guidelines for exposure to radiofrequency radiation (RF) and extremely low-frequency
electromagnetic1 fields (ELF-EMF) for the following
reasons:

•
The overwhelming evidence of adverse non-thermal
health effects at exposures many times below the current guide lines.

•
The near 100% penetration of the market in Europe,
the USA
and many other markets by mobile phones and increasing penetration elsewhere.

•
The vast proliferation of wireless networks and
devices beyond those envisaged at the time the current guidelines were set.

We call for the ICNIRP to reconvene as a matter of urgency to
reassess the exposure guidelines and to develop and implement biologically
based public safety limits reflecting the overall scientific evidence that
existing ICNIRP guidelines are not sufficiently protective against health
effects from chronic exposures to the rapidly increasing environmental-level
ELF-EMF and RF.

Failing that

We call for the setting up of an independent body to
define new biologically based public exposure limits and/or preventative
actions, for ELF-EMF and RF, that address reported biological effects, which,
with prolonged exposure, can reasonably be presumed to result in adverse health
consequences.

In the absence of such recommendations we suggest as
an intermediate step that the HPA and UK Government immediately implement the
ELF-EMF and RF recommendations of the BioInitiative Report 2007 and strive for
the recommendations of the Public Health Department of the Government of
Salzburg (2002) of 0.06 V/m for outdoor and 0.02 V/m for indoor RF exposure.
Based on the precautionary principle, children and vulnerable groups (such as
people with epilepsy and heart conditions)
should not be exposed to a risk of harm, thus we propose that

Children under 16 should use mobile phones and
cordless phones for emergency calls only.

No Wi-fi, WiMax or other forms of wireless
networking are placed in homes, schools or public areas or promoted for use
thereof.

That regular and frequent independent audits are
undertaken of emissions to ensure that base stations ("masts") do not exceed
the new biologically based guidelines at any locality either singly or by
accumulation. Such audits should be widely publicised and made available for
public scrutiny. The precautionary principle needs to be implemented."

The Following Scientists and Individuals were speakers at the Conference held at the Royal Society from which the London Resolution has come.

Prof Olle Johansson has published over 300 peer reviewed papers, many in the
field of EMF bioeffects. He lectures frequently on this issue, and
conducts experimental research on weak field effects on surface
tissues. Sweden is the only country in the World that recognise EHS as
a disability.

Dr
Lennart Hardellis
professor in oncology and cancer epidemiology at the University
Hospital in Orebro, Sweden. Most of his research has been on risk
factors for cancer such as exposure to pesticides and persistent
organic pollutants. During recent years he and his co-workers have
studied use of cellular and cordless telephones and the risk for
brain tumours. This research is independently funded unlike the Interphone studies.

Roger
Coghill has for over twenty years directed an independent
bioelectromagnetics laboratory in South Wales, specialising on the
interactions between the physical energies of electricity and magnetism
and organic life.

Dr. Gerd Oberfeldis
responsible for environmental medicine and since 1994 has been
adviser for environmental medicine of the Austrian Medical
Association being responsible for the postgraduate course in
Environmental Medicine. His
Government warn that WiFi should not be used in schools. It also has
the lowest exposure guidelines in the World.

Dr. John Walker is a Chartered Physicist who lives in Sutton Coldfield

Dr
Christopher Busby, Subcontractor, Policy Interpretation Network on
Children's Health and Environment (PINCHE) - The PINCHE-project is a
Policy Interpretation Network on Children's Health and Environment
that is funded by the European Union for three years. The PINCHE
project is designed to provide decision makers, environmental health
professionals, and other stakeholders with information relevant for
policy development. This will help making decisions about issues in
the area of children's health and environment.

Dr Robert Verkerk is from The
Alliance for Natural Health (ANH) was founded in 2002 and is a
UK-based, internationally-active, non-governmental organization,
working to help positively shape the regulatory and scientific
framework affecting natural health.

Cindy
Sage is a first author of the Bioinitiative review of scientific
literature on EMF bioeffects, a review which concluded that the
ICNIRP guidelines are inadequate to protect public health.

The Birds, the Bees and Electromagnetic Pollution, by Dr. Andrew Goldsworthy, May 2009

How electromagnetic fields can disrupt both solar and magnetic bee navigation and reduce immunity to disease all in one go

Many
of our birds are disappearing mysteriously from the urban environment and our
bees are now under serious threat. There is increasing evidence that at least
some of this is due to electromagnetic pollution such as that from cell towers,
cell phones, DECT cordless phones and Wifi. It appears capable of interfering
with their navigation systems and also their circadian rhythms, which in turn
reduces their resistance to disease.The
most probable reason is that these animals use a group of magnetically-sensitive
substances called cryptochromes for
magnetic and solar navigation and also to control the activity of their immune
systems.

Birds
are very sensitive to electromagnetic fields and some may find the electromagnetically
polluted urban environment no longer tolerable. Migratory birds may also lose
their sense of direction and never reach their intended destination, perhaps
just falling into the sea on the way. Bees are even more under threat and are
extremely important to
us. Without bee pollination, there would be very few brightly colored or
scented flowers in the countryside or in our gardens and many of our crops
would be devastated. We would be left just with crops that are wind pollinated
(mostly cereals) that do not on their own provide a healthy balanced diet,
nor do they act as host to the friendly nitrogen fixing bacteria that are
essential to the sustainable fertility of our soil. This may be a very heavy price to pay for
our unrestricted use of cell phones and other forms of wireless communication.

Factsheet: the three main health risks associated with energy saving lamps (CFLs)

(Note we have been sent the following Fact Sheet on "Energy Saving Lamps" which are certainly a concern for many people and especially those who can no longer tolerate radiofrequency outputs from such sources due to sensitivity brought on by Mobile Phone Masts and other microwave sources. For more information click here.)

There
is a trend in the European Union of promoting the widespread use of
energy-saving light bulbs. Moreover, the EU and several other countries across
the world have recently decided to ban conventional, incandescent lamps in the
near future.

Despite
this trend, concerns have been raised on the safety and health effects of
energy saving light bulbs, more specifically of Compact Fluorescent Lights
(CFLs), the main type of energy-saving light bulb currently on the market.

Below
is a summary of the three principal health risks associated with energy saving
lamps, namely electromagnetic fields, mercury and UV radiation.

Dongle Putting Up a Mast Near Us!

You may have noticed a recent rash of Mobile Phone Mast planning
applications for "fill-in" masts in towns across the UK - mainly from Vodafone, but also
from T-Mobile and O2.

The reason for this large number of planning applications to
extend the mostly pointless 3G network is to cash in on the current gimmick for
"Mobile Internet" using a USB "dongle" that plugs into laptops and PCs.

This latest marketing hype is the Mobile Phone Operators'
last gasp strategy to re-invent the 3G network (originally designed for video
calls) for web access. This has become possible by adding "HSPA" support for
data packets on top of the 3G network.

As with all 3G uses so far the hype far outstrips the
usefulness of the "Mobile Internet" and its "dongle". It is just another gadget
aimed at office executives whose own access to websites such as FaceBook (and
worse!) is blocked by their employers.

To try and exploit and expand on this lucrative niche market
the Mobile Phone Operators are marketing the "dongles" and "Mobile Internet" as
a rival to BT's fixed-line and Virgin Media's cable-based broadband. By
persuading office workers to use their "dongles" in their home PCs and laptops
the aim is to replace cable and ADSL broadband with the "Mobile Internet"
instead. At a theoretical maximum speed of 14.4Mbs and a real-world maximum
speed of 7.2Mbs "Mobile Internet" is actually slower than fixed-line or cable
internet - even where 3G coverage is at its best (i.e. where there are more
masts). It's like "WAP" all over again.